non-linear portfolio

perhaps the brain – as non-linear portfolio

ie’s

[monika; jake; willow; willow using it to get into uni; on the brain )…and kirill helping us with community network ]

aka: Jerry, Jerry’s brain

_____

actually…

a commonplace-book/portfolio/journal that is too big to know and too small to label.. so that it is incredibly useful.. allowing energies to be spent more deeply, most of all more fittingly

an alive documentational dance in perpetual beta. perhaps a more humane way to be.

art ist ness – whimsy mapping – the it is me.. non-linear portfolio – stacking haeccities of deep learning in deep addressess .. ness.

aka: the nondocumenting ness of eudaimonia.

_____

We’re imagining this as an alternative means to standardized testing.. but more important, an alternative means to living. Imagine if we move away from our obsession with proving things and into a more intention economy, where our days are filled with things that matter, to us.
We’re imagining self-assessment (conversing with self) to be one of the most important skills/habits/practices any person can undertake/own. You are the only human that will be with you until the day you die. If you can become an expert at assessing/tutoring yourself, at keeping yourself on task of doing what matters to you, well, that helps us all. no?

What we’re seeking is a means to capture a person, rather than specifics. ie: Is the person only good if the things they have done are completed?  What makes a person employable. What does that even mean?

Perhaps something like the brain can model the importance of whimsy, of people brave enough to change their mind.

We’re currently prototyping this non-linear portfolio idea by hand – with software called the brain.
In a way, this is a compromise, because even in doing this, you do become focused on nodes, accolades even.
In a way, this is good, because it is yet another way of self-reflecting.

How to find the balance?  We’re wondering if tech might help us with this. We’re wondering if tech might jump start us back to a more natural state, where being matters most/first. How can we focus more on doing from being, and less on doing from reward/proving/accolade/credentialing/grades..?

Our wondering is if tech can be crafted to create a non-linear portfolio as a trail to our daily being/talking/doing, rather than us or others spending huge amounts of time documenting and policy-izing credentials that may or may not even be valid.

see more on the app here. and here.

That’s what an app/chip/tech – we hope – will do. Create this trail.. as we use tech as our fake mother per se (talking to the app daily – imagine people that don’t have their mom or whoever right there to talk to.. but also.. in need of an echo chamber.. that stillness… where they are truly talking about what matters to them.. no judgment) – so that everyone is known by someone via this listening of curiosities..

so the nodes represent:
curiosities, connections (to people, ideas, knowledge), things you actually do..

Find out more about the vision of how tech might help hasten the time period between a person finding something that matters and finding his/her people.

_________________________

imagine this:

One major reason for shift/flip/whatever – given by Denise Pope in her research at Stanford. We had been using the figure 75%, but she shared recently on Steve Hargadon‘s Future of Ed, over 90% of kids are saying they cheat. [the 75% was from the kids i have been working with, that say 75% cheat or cram the night before a test, either way, not remembering it – a week or so later]
So – while we continue to end each sentence in regard to public ed with: and they did (or didn’t) do well on the test, or …they are above/below average.. what do those test scores, that data we are using, what do they really represent? If at best, for most, it represents the ability to put in print – on a test, some information, that perhaps only stays with us for a weeks time thereafter, we need to ask, what’s more risky? How risky could following your whimsy be? Perhaps what we’re doing now. perhaps what we’re considering – playing it safe – is much more risky. no?

_________________________________

a different mindset on what matters to getting in places..

__________________________________

perhaps a networked individualism-type brain, generated mainly from daily self-talk would even help facilitate visions such as mit’s admission process..

__________________________________

intro’d to this term –  haeccities  –  by Benjmain Bratton via deep address:

Instead of the  popular term, “the internet of things,” which implies a network of physical objects, Bratton prefers the more esoteric sounding, “internet of haeccities” which would include objects, but also concepts and memes, addressable at the same level, but at multiple scales, through the same system.  “Scales blur and what seemed solid becomes fuzzy. Inevitably we see that any apparently solid scale is really only a temporary state of resolution.” 

The bottom line, says Bratton:

the inherent intelligence of the world could be more self-reflexive in new and important ways.

ie: a commonplace-book/portfolio/journal that is too big to know and too small to label.. so that it is incredibly useful.. allowing energies to be spent more deeply, most of all more fittingly

ie: an alive documentation in perpetual beta. perhaps a more humane way to be.

___________________________________